Contact these FAA personnel and tell them NO EXPANSION, NO TAX PAYER DOLLARS FOR THE RUNWAY FOR NO ONE.

Here's a LETTER you can send to the FAA
Open this Link and Print, Send in the mail
Deadline October 8, 2008

TAKE ACTION NOW-

Bridge to No Where: Runway Expansion for No One

This is our response to Mayor Young's Commentary Aug 28, 2008 EPN

A 5,000 ft runway at Flying Cloud Airport will service less than 1% of the airport's users.

But, it's a very wealthy 1%, who according to Glenn Orcutt of the FAA's Great Lakes Division, consists of large corporations. Large corporations are, in fact, the only determiners of whether the runway actually goes through. Why? Because they've lobbied the FAA for it. And all they had to do was ask.

Runway development is not based on need, because operations at Flying Cloud Airport have steadily decreased for decades. It's not because there isn't already ample capacity for larger corporate jets, because there are at least four other airports in close proximity to accommodate them. Why then? It's because of what Jack Lanners, the current MAC chair, refers to as "convenience."

These corporations want their aircraft parked in their back yards.

Not only will we be bailing out all the big movers and shakers, but by subsidizing the mode of travel of local corporations, we will be giving away our mortgage payments and our kids' tuition money to the tune of millions in earmarks for pork projects, like the FCM expansion.

This summer we appealed to the city council to view our video presentation concerning the increase in noise violations and the consequences of a change from small neighborhood airport to corporate hub.

The council voted unanimously not to view the video. Whether they watched it or not, the council couldn't even try to make the thousands of noise complaints we've had this past summer go away. The public is irate, not just because there are constant violations of the voluntary curfew, but because there's the greater threat of larger, noisier aircraft in the future.

Few people know about FAA rules, but for the city to appeal to the FAA for a mandatory curfew while asking them to spend millions expanding a runway which will result in more noise, is sending a mixed message. Really the wrong message because our Mayor is simply pandering to the public. The FAA doesn't allow any mandatory curfews at airports.

The city would have to do a Part 161 study, which MAC and the city specifically avoided in 2002 because of the $3M to $4M costs of conducting a study. Every neighborhood airport wants a mandatory curfew. In Burbank California, the airport authority recently presented a draft for a study that would impose mandatory limits on flights from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m..

Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority Proposes Curfew

According to the press release, "This would be the first application to the FAA for a [mandatory curfew] by any U.S. airport since Congress passed the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990, which barred airport imposition of new access restrictions unless approved by the FAA." "This is groundbreaking territory. We know we have an uphill battle, but the deal is to fight the fight and go as far as we can."

Evidently "it's hard to gauge what the FAA is thinking because no airport has ever started and finished a 161 study."

But, Phil Young should know all of this.

What our Mayor may not know is that the FAA just put out a timely request; timely because it's no time for pork and no time for taxpayers to foot the bill for expanding an unnecessary runway. The FAA request asks the public to weigh in on discretionary grant funding to non-primary airports like Flying Cloud Airport.

If in fact the fiscal accountability our council leadership has talked about is on the level, we can hardly believe Eden Prairie wants to put $3M to $4M down on a study which no community has ever completed successfully. And this surely is not the time for a $10M runway expansion for a few corporations just because they don't want to use Holman Field, Lakeville, Anoka or MSP. After all, our hard earned tax dollars will already be at work saving our entire financial system.

Don't you think it's fair to ask Best Buy, Super Value and others to park their aircraft somewhere else? Businesses need us a lot more than we need them. We should all remember that next time we go out to shop.

For more information on how you can contact the FAA and stop the expansion, which is stopping the increase in noise from larger jet aircraft, go to this URL www.zeroexpansion.org . Or email us at transportationtalk@yahoo.com

NOTE: Does that mean we give up on monetary penalties for violations? No. We should demand that our legislators and local leaders work on penalizing the violaters of voluntary curfews with monetary penalties.. It's really time the public stop forking over and the users become accountable to the set limitations. It's clear, they must not take them very seriously.

Contact these FAA personnel and tell them NO EXPANSION, NO TAX PAYER DOLLARS FOR THE RUNWAY FOR NO ONE.

*Bob Huber, ADO Manager
Jesse Carriger, Assistant ADO Manager<

Minneapolis Airports District Office
Federal Aviation Administration
6020 28th Avenue, South, Room 102
Minneapolis, MN 55450

Phone: 612-713-4350
FAX: 612-713-4364

Contact List: Minneapolis ADO, MSP-600

*Jeri Alles, Division Manager
Debbie Roth, Assistant Division Manager
Mary Kruger, Administrative Officer
Cindi Leitner Administrative Program Assistant

U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration
Great Lakes Region Airports Division
2300 E. Devon Avenue , Des Plaines , Illinois 60018

Phone: 847-294-7272

FAX: 847-294-7036

Contact List: Office of the Division Manager, AGL-600

*Elliott Black, Planning and Programming Branch Manager
Paul Lo, Regional Planning Specialist/Capacity officer
*Sharon Burkes, Regional AIP Funds Control

Federal Aviation Administration
Planning and Programming Branch, AGL-610
2300 East Devon Avenue
Des Plaines , Illinois 60018

Phone: 847-294-7272
FAX: 847-294-7036

Contact List: Planning and Programming, AGL-610

30+ Years Fighting the Flying Cloud Airport Expansion
Candidate Forum

State and City Candidates will Join us for Zero Expansion's Forum October 1, 2008-
Candidate Forum and Historical Exhibit Eden Prairie City Center
Heritage Rooms
October 1, 2008 From 7 to 9PM

There are still long time residents right here in Eden Prairie who tell it like it was (and is because they are still fighting the expansion):

"The first meeting in Eden Prairie about the jets and noise and concern for expansion was in Spring or Summer of '75 at the home of an Eden Prairie resident, several representatives from Mac, one of the business owners, and other neighbors were present."

"Way back in 1975 Eden Prairie homeowners served on FCAC commission, they witnessed the discussions and debate which resulted in the now defunct Ordinance 51, which MAC agreed to put in place, enforce and stand with the community.

Come and view 30+ years of news clippings, letters, and articles all related to the 30= years fight against the Flying Cloud Airport expansion.

Participate in our candidate forum. Candidates running for the Minnesota Legislature will have an opportunity at the beginning of the session to introduce themselves and respond to some audience questions related to airport issues in Eden Prairie.

The rest of the Forum will focus on city council participants, three of whom responded to a list of questions via email; their responses are included here..

At the Forum all the city council candidates will participate in a discussion session based on five or six different questions that each candidate will be able to address both individually and in a round table discussion. Audience questions will be allowed.

Sherry Butcher's Answers
Ron Case's Answers
Jeff Meyerhofer's Answers
Brad Aho's Answers

The Correct Answers

Article Links

09/29/1996	03/18/1999	August 2001 Briefing Book
04/21/2005	12/28/2005	02/17/2008

NEIGHBORS IN UPROAR OVER NOISE VIOLATIONS

There were 605 VIOLATIONS (that were self-reported by residents; that means there were others that didn't get reported) IN A TWO MONTH PERIOD AT FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT IN EDEN PRAIRIE, MN this year.

Zero Expansion was scheduled to make a short video presentation at the July 15th Council meeting. We canceled our presentation because the city protested our use of their system to show our videos. Why? Because they don't want it in the public realm.

Now the entire nation/ world can view the videos of noise violators at Flying Cloud Airport because they're up at YOUTUBE. The Eden Prairie City Council can't stop the videos from being shown. We heard that all five on the council voted against Zero Expansion showing the video Tuesday night., July 15th.

Airport neighbors have been complaining about night time noise for years. We don’t feel it’s a coincidence that the presentation Zero Expansions made in January 2008 to the FCAAC provided the impetus for a recent change in the way MAC will monitor noise in the future. Zero Expansion has argued that noise has not been accurately assessed. At the FCAAC meeting this July, MAC announced that they were going to install a radar system of monitoring which could catch as much as 95% of the noise disturbances. At this same FCAAC meeting it was announced that there were 605 reported disturbances, by residents, in a 2 month time span this year. How many letters went out to those violators? We believe if you don't have a commensurate penalty for the violation, than the numbers of violations will not go down just because you've measured them more accurately. The city needs to find out the ratio of letters to violators, and repeat violators, and than work with MAC to actualize a penalty that will make all this extra paper and leg work unnecessary.

You can find Zero Expansion’s presentation on the inadequacy of the noise monitoring from January 2008 at http://www.zeroexpansion.com/home.html#noise.

The videos we were going to present at the City Council Meeting on Tuesday are a reminder that residents are still impacted on a daily basis by violators of the voluntary curfew. What makes the voluntary curfew unfeasible is the fact that users of the system don’t have to self report their violations; the onus is on the recipients of the noise. No wonder the voluntary system hasn’t worked. Hopefully the radar system will accurately measure the violations.

As to refusing to allow a public viewing of the videos, the city says their in-house technology will be taxed by four other presentations which were scheduled for Tuesday night and our presentation will interfere. We’re not sure whether the Chamber or the MAC would be given that same response. At least we know they would be rescheduled. No such offer was made to Zero Expansion. It's apparent to us that our elected officials want to keep this issue out of the public realm; they have also made it quite clear they have neither the time to give us, nor the interest, nor the will, to continue to address one of the most significant issues in Eden Prairie.

The recent video of aircraft taking off during the voluntary nighttime curfew can also be found at our blog at http://wwwzeroexpansion.blogspot.com/ or on YOUTUBE at the URLs listed above. Groups of airport neighbors have been measuring noise violations during the summer months and discovered frequent abuse of the voluntary curfew between the hours of 5, 6 and 7 AM. The videos show four different flights taking off within minutes of each other from approximately 5:49 AM to around approximately 6:11 AM. We've argued repeatedly that the system of measuring noise and penalizing violators with a letter is not working.

High Flyers - How Private Jet Travel Is Straining the System, Warming the Planet, and Costing You Money

A Report by the Institute for Policy Studies

view pdf  

As Americans prepare to pay extra for checked bags, wait in long lines, and endure increasingly crowded commercial flights, super-wealthy private jet owners are enjoying tax breaks and luxury at the public’s expense. “High Flyers: How Private Jet Travel Is Straining the System, Warming the Planet, and Costing You Money,” a report from the Institute for Policy Studies and Essential Action, exposes the impacts of private aviation on the air traffic system, carbon emissions, and everyday travelers. The report criticizes government inaction to rein in gas-guzzling, sky-crowding private jets, and the super-wealthy High Flyers who dodge security restrictions, carbon costs, and taxes.

FAA Budget, AATF and General Aviation

Presented to the FCAAC on March 13, 2008 by Mark Michelson, Zero Expansion Member And Member of the FCAAC Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission

view pdf  

Zero Expansion Presentation to the Eden Prairie Airport Advisory Commission January 2008

Laura Neuman presenting and Mark Michelson, Eden Prairie Airport Advisory Commission Member

Click here and save file  to view Powerpoint presentation.

Complaint Redux: Eden Prairie is no different than other small airport communities against airport noise and pollution

Here's a recent article from Martin Rubin, who lives near Santa Monica airport and is the director of a local organization like Zero Expansion. Santa Monica Airport is a General Aviation airport similar to ours. Though Santa Monica's operations are down, like ours, their jet operations increased by twenty-fold: our future?

Santa Monica Daily Press
Friday, Decemver 14, 2007

Guest Commentary
by Martin Rubin regarding proposed Santa Monica Airport ordinance

What's really up with the airport?

A buzz is going around among aviation enthusiasts as well as residents who feel they have had to endure much more than their share of aviation impacts. The City of Santa Monica has made a move in the right direction by unanimously passing the first-reading of an ordinance that limits what size and speed aircraft can be used at its airport. The City's arguments are clear and valid to all who read them; all but the FAA and affected users of the airport.

Santa Monica Airport (SMO) has changed so much since the short-sighted agreement in 1984 that the City and the FAA contracted into. Piston aircraft annual operations are down approximately 125,000 while jet operations have increased twenty-fold. The Big Brother Orwellian images brought to mind by the date 1984 are very appropriate today as the FAA flexes its muscle with threats of challenging this proposed ordinance on behalf of some airport users.

Although the 1984 Santa Monica Airport Agreement was designed to address the concerns of the surrounding communities regarding noise, jets account for 90% of the measured noise violations. The agreement was a raw deal dealt to the community but quite a sweet deal for the jet operators. Disregard to the air quality changes that 20,000 jet operations a year would have was like rubbing salt into that raw wound. The question that concerns many who are negatively impacted by present day airport operations is: How well will this new ordinance really address all community-related safety concerns at and near SMO?

Let us assume the ordinance is adopted and goes unchallenged. We will be left with at least 10,000 annual jet operations. These smaller, slower jets are not necessarily less noisy or less air polluting than the other 10,000 which could no longer use SMO, and so we should not think air and noise pollution will be cut by 50% or more. A 1999 risk assessment by Bill Piazza from the Los Angeles Unified School District Office of Environmental Health and Safety concluded that 10,000 annual jet operations significantly increased the cancer risks to the communities east, south and north of the airport. Feeling good about reducing jet operations from 20,000 to 10,000, and believing that it will be an adequate solution to jet air pollution, would be like bragging about cutting back on smoking cigarettes from four packs to just two packs a day. For years, impacted residents have been suffering from these jet emissions. They are real and they occur on a daily basis. Some families are so concerned for the safety of their children that they move away. In recent European studies, noise pollution has also been shown to adversely affect human health. It is crucial that air and noise pollution are also considered when determining airport safety. The definition of safety according to the Microsoft Encarta Reference Library is, "freedom from danger: protection from or nonexposure to the risk of harm or injury".

The ordinance the City passed is long overdue and was greatly influenced by community pressure. Therefore, it is important for everyone, especially those concerned about their family's health and safety, including their pets, to speak out every chance they can.

It is time for the City to aggressively address the pollution problem that has cast an ominous shadow over Santa Monica's environmentally- friendly reputation.

Martin Rubin - Director of Concerned Residents Against Airport Pollution

Mark Michelson of Eden Prairie speaks on behalf of Zero Expansion
One after another, neighboring airport communities, residents and city officials, talked the same talk in front of a panel of legislators and MAC officials at a hearing on MAC Governance, Wednesday, Sept 19th, 2007 at the Egan Community Center. We heard the old same lingo; it’s been the same for years: MAC has failed to provide accessible public venues where residents can air their complaints; MAC has failed to legally comply with requests for information; MAC has failed to comply with legal protocol in doing business; MAC has failed to keep their promises; MAC has been less than honest in their dealings with the public. One resident after another with another version of the same complaints. You could see the expressions on the legislators’ faces. Finally Representative Linda Slocum (DFL) and Mark Buesgens ( R) echoed the audience: MAC needs to be reconstituted; something dramatic needs to be done... Legislative Hearings on MAC Governance will begin soon...

Start Thinking About Tomorrow: MAC tunes out the reality of an unsustainable industry that uses an unsustainable fuel.

MAC's CIP for runway 10R/28L to 5,000 ft, to the tune of $11M, set for 2009 expansion

It wasn't too long ago, pre-Mayor Young, that Scott Neal told us our worry over the airport expansion was for naught, because there were no funds. Enter Phil Young and a first ever Legislative Agenda requesting federal funds for the airport; enter the letter delivered to Federal Legislators requesting funding for the expansion on behalf of businesses and Chamber of Commerce; enter Chamber of Commerce meetings with MAC, the Mayor and a representative from the FCM Advisory Airports Commission which included a discussion of airport funding and private business involvement in securing funding; enter the Airports Advisory Commission plans to align with the Chamber in business development and marketing the airport: the result is funds that weren't even imaginable to MAC are on their CIP for 2009.

MAC's CIP, Capital Improvement Program for Flying Cloud Airport as of September 2007

Preliminary 2008-20014 MAC CIP- pgs 52-70
2008-Runway 10L/28R Extention- $900,000.00 -
2009-Runway 10R28L Exention- $11,200,000.00- (5,000ft runway)
Hangar Buidling Removal
Alleyway Rehabilitation
Pavement Rehabilitation
Runway 18/36 Reconstruction Seg 3/Lighting
South Building Area Development- 2009-2010
(Note: there is no mention of where the funds are coming from)

$84M on an expansion for an airport that's not self-sufficient, and is experiencing its lowest number of operations and just think the community doesn't even have representation on the MAC commission....

• The expansion was planned 20 years ago. Now FCM is experiencing its lowest operational numbers and its noise complaints have tripled; the relievers aren't self-sufficient and safety and security, which were non-issues 20 years ago, have made airports vulnerable; skies are more crowded and the ATC can't handle what's in the sky now. So, why put more planes in the sky? Why expand a runway 5,000ft when less than 1% of the airport's users need it?
• While state funds for surface transportation and replacement infrastructure have not kept up with national trends, the Pawlenty administration supported MSP expansions at $850M plus.
• Appointments to the MAC commission are political appointments made by the Governor.
• Minneapolis/St Paul neighbors want the legislature to rethink plans for an airport outside the Metro; if that comes to pass there is no reason to expand the relievers, whose function was never intended for quasi-commercial jet operations.

Take action now and tell our representatives transportation funds should be spent where they're needed most for public use, not on an expansion of a runway for a handful of wealthy corporate aircraft owners:

Governor Tim Pawlenty-tim.pawlenty@state.mn.us
Erik Paulsen-rep.erik.paulsen@house.mn
David Hann-651-296-1749 or http://www.davidhann.org/contact.htm
Maria Ruud-rep.maria.ruud@house.mn
Phil Young-pyoung@edenprairie.org
Brad Aho- baho@edenprairie.org
Sherry Butcher- sbutcher@edenprairie.org
Kathy Nelson- knelson@edenprairie.org
Tim Anderson of MAC- TAnderso@mspmac.org
Chauncey Case of Met Council- Chauncey.case@metc.state.mn.usa

Public Hearing September 19th, 2007 on Metropolitan Airports Commission Governance Issues at 7:00 PM, Eagan Community Center.

Local Government and Metropolitan Affairs Rep. Debra Hilstrom, Chair and the and Transportation Working Group, Rep Frank Hornstein, Chair

Statement from Zero Expansion, Eden Prairie, Minnesota

WHY BUILD NEW HANGARS WHEN
THERE'S ENOUGH EXISTING HANGAR SPACE?

TELL JIM OBERSTAR ENOUGH WITH THE PORK-PH:(202) 225-6211

TAKE ACTION! NO CHAMBER INVOLVEMENT IN ADVISORY COMMISSION. NO PROMOTION OF IMPROVEMENTS BY CITY THAT INVOLVE EXPANSION PLANS. KEEP CONTACTING YOUR CITY REPRESENTATIVES AND REMIND THEM THEY PLEDGED TO BE NEUTRAL!

The Noise Myth: Jets aren't quieter than Pistons

A warning to Eden Prairie airport neighbors, Santa Monica Airport neighbors, like so many others, have been ripped off regarding noise impact measurements. Aside from the Db difference, do to the distance differential from noise monitors, there are noise impacts from jet-specific operations that go unmeasured. Ignored is the noise from reverse thrusters, often much louder than the approach. We hear reverse thrusters ½ mile to the east of the airport when they are applying the reverse thrusters to stop their aircraft far down the runway to the west. This same noise is perceived much louder by the Santa Monica residents on the west side of the airport. All this very loud noise is not part of any measurements. Also, there is the ongoing noise of jets holding and idling sometimes more than 30 minutes at a time and often backed up. It sounds like having a commercial vacuum cleaner running across the street many hours, each day, seven days a week. Again, this jet-related noise is not measured. Another very important consideration that goes to the heart of the difference is that jet-blasts noise, on take offs especially and carry very much farther than even loud piston aircraft noise. I do not know of any studies to measure and quantify what the differences are, but there should be. A jet take-off is always heard, loud and clear, for two or more miles from the aircraft’s location. I do not ever hear a piston plane when it's taking off. This is clear, simple science using anecdotal evidence, of a tremendous difference in how jet aircraft impacts a much, much larger area with relation to noise than piston aircraft.

   -- Martin Rubin, Director of jetairpollution.com, a group fighting against the public health dangers at Santa Monica Airport  www.jetairpollution.com

Eden Prairie and Zero Expansion Documents

CONTACT, FLYER AND MEETING INFORMATION

For Eden Prairie Residents Only: for further updates please email us to register on our mailing list. transportationtalk@yahoo.com

Meeting Flyer PDFs: Print and Distribute to Neighbors

LATEST FLYER March 2007

Current Zero Expansion Ad

EVERY NOISE COMPLAINT GOES ON RECORD AND MAKES A DIFFERENCE.

Contact the Airport Noise Complaint Line: Phone in your noise complaints or other airport complaints to: 612-726-9411 or macapps@macnoise.com

FILE NOISE COMPLAINT ONLINE AT THIS URL: http://www.macnoise.com/complaint

COMPLAINT GUIDELINES: http://www.macnoise.com/pdfs/community-outreach/complaint_guidelines_2006.pdf

Noise Complaint Flyer

Flying Cloud Airport Facts | Zero Expansion Mission Statement | Jet Fuel Pollution | Archive Articles
FCM Economic Role & Impact | Property Values | Airplane Noise/Neighborhood Watch
How Children are Impacted | Security at FCM | Candidate Questionnaire | MAC Contacts
Final Environmental Impact Statement | Airport Buzz | NWA Comments | Sierra Club | Talktrans Research Group

© Zero Expansion/Talktrans